Croydon Council welcomes judgement on young asylum seeker's ages
7:20am Wednesday 13th May 2009 in
Croydon Council has won a battle in the High Court over the age of asylum seekers.
Thousands of young asylum seekers arriving in the country claim to be minors to forgo some of the formalities adults have to go through when applying for asylum.
The High Court test case focussed on two Afghan youths who told immigration officials they were 15.
But social workers judged them to be over 18 and therefore classified as adults.
After being classified as adults, they sought help from Dr Diana Birch, a pediatric specialist who had previously provided age assessments for young asylum seekers.
She informed officials she thought one was 15 and the other around 14, but on Friday, Mr Justice Collins said a pediatrician’s assessment was not any more reliable than that of a well-trained and experienced social worker.
And, although the report of pediatrician’s such as Dr Birch should not be disregarded, Croydon Council was allowed to rely on the assessment of its social workers.
More than fifty cases were waiting on the ruling, which will affect thousands of other child asylum seekers, and has huge financial implications for the councils affected.
Foreign children who come in to the UK are given care and support and are entitled to education.
They are given legal aid and are not subject to the same deportation laws as adults, even if asylum claims are rejected.
If officials think someone is lying about their age, an independent doctor is called in to verify whether or not their claims are real.
In January it emerged through a Croydon Guardian investigation that many immigrants are given the same date of birth after they claim not to have valid identification proving their age.
A council spokesman said: “We welcome this judgement.
"It has been a long and hard fought campaign and this decision vindicates Croydon’s approach to care of unaccompanied asylum seeking children.
“We always seek to protect the interests of children and every effort is made to determine the age of these young people in a fair and consistent manner as has been upheld by the court.”
Comments(5)
Sal ibn hari
says...
9:27am Wed 13 May 09
They are here for the benefits system which they know exactly how to work to their advantage.
It's high time that Britain pushed for proper regulation of those seeking asylum and making sure that those seeking asylum go to the first *safe country* rather than the *only country with a really decent benefits system.*
We need to push the 'no papers, no entry' too.
Brian Sewer Jnr
says...
3:20pm Wed 13 May 09
Patrick Ratnaraja
says...
3:40pm Fri 15 May 09
Are you trying to say that Britain has got the best benefit system?
There are other Countries than Britain. They have brilliant benefit systems. In Canada if you are out of work you get 60% of your last salary for 12 months.
I came here as an asylum seeker and I have paid more Tax than you have probably earned in your entire life.
Never claimed any benefit.
Britain signed a UN convention saying that it would welcome refugees.
Just because these Children come from third World Countries don’t think that they come here for benefits.
My argument is that if a Paediatrician is not properly trained to find out the age of a child then who else can? I would say that Police officer is properly trained to pass Judgement in a Court of Law than a Judge.
Sal ibn hari
says...
8:53pm Sat 16 May 09
I for one am fed up with funding these freeloaders from what I earn; I would rather immigration to this country ceased because we are getting ripped off.
We get criminals who rape and murder, others who cannot work. Disease sufferers who feel the need to share it amongst the indigenous population. There must be a few decent ones amongst that lot but lets not try and find them - let's just keep the lot out.
As for your comment about paying more tax than I have you have no idea of my personal circumstances so that was rather an invalid remark to make.
"Just because these Children come from third World Countries don’t think that they come here for benefits."
The point is Ratnaraja these are not children.
In this litigation fuelled society these so-called paedatricians are more likely to find in the favour of the 'child' to avoid Court action for compensation and damages.
Whilst we are talking about matters of law, Judges test the law against the matter before them; a police officer uses the force of law to take someone to a Court for that test to be fairly made.
More News stories
Most popular
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
Patrick Ratnaraja says...
8:30am Wed 13 May 09
Why do all these Doctors spend so much time and effort to get trained properly to become Doctors? Why not join as Croydon Council social workers?
Croydon Council may have won their case but I feel for those innocent Children who are victims of war. They are now victims of injustice in a so called democratic Country.
If my Children fall ill I will take them to Croydon Council and not to Mayday Hospital.
Children should be cared for and not treated like criminals.